Practical Information - Generative Linguistics in the Old World

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Stages of grammaticalization of the assertion structure in Spanish varieties.Maria Luisa Zubizarreta / University of Southern CaliforniaThis paper examines the specificational pseudo-cleft (PCleft) in standard Spanish (StSp) and inspoken Peninsular Spanish (SPSp), as well as the focus copular structure (FocCop) in CaribbeanSpanish (CSp), and argues that these reveal different stages of the grammaticalization of the biclausalAssertion Structure of the sentence (i.e the presupposition/assertion divide). A biclausalqua-ellipsisanalysis is shown to readily capture the grammatical properties and the historicalconnection between the P-cleft and the FocCop structure. It is furthermore suggested that“focusing via marked word ordering” in SSp is best analyzed as a case of reduplication of vPsqua-ellipsis, and it is proposed that this case constitutes the ultimate grammaticalization of theAS, where the presupposition and assertion parts share the same T(ense), but branch out intotwo distinct vPs. The focused phrase is identified as the constituent in the asserted clause thatis adjacent to the left-edge of the CP or vP phase at PF (Molnar & Winkler 2010).Alongside PClefts introduced by a wh-phrase (as in English), StSp also has PCleftsintroduced by a relative pronoun, composed of a definite weak pronominal element plus thecomplementizer que. These can be analyzed as a structure with an operator-variable in the precopularclause (the presupposition) and a post-copular clause (the assertion). Forward ellipsisdeletes all but the focused constituent in the assertion (Ross 1972, Schlenker 1998, 2003, DenDikken et al. 2000).(1) a. De la que te hablé fué de Maria. (StSp)of Fem.Sg. that (I) to you.spoke was of Maria.b. [ CP [de la que] i te hablé e i ] [ fué [ CP te hablé de María]]]Of particular interest is the case of the neuter lo in (2a) bound to the complement ofhacer, which cannot be anything else than an event-denoting DP; cf. (2b) and (2c). Thus, (2a)shows that in a PCleft, where the op-vbl relation is formed via movement, it is the semanticcontent (not the syntactic form) of the variable that must match that of the focus phrase.(2) a. Lo que debes hacer es comprar un coche nuevo. (StSp)Neut.3Sg. that must.2PSg. do is buy a new car.‘What you must do is buy a new car.’b. Debes hacer ésto: comprar un coche nuevo.Must.2PSg do this: buy a new car.c. *Debes hacer comprar un coche nuevoMust.2PSg. do buy a car newPclefts in SPSp, first described by Fernandez-Soriano 2009, have the peculiarity that partof the assertion is elided in the post-copular rather than in the expected pre-copular part. This“ellipsis mismatch” so to speak, is particularly conspicuous in cases of idioms (3).(3) Lo que no puedes meter es la pata hasta el punto de que te echen. (SPSp, F-S 2009)3PSg.Neut. (you) cannot put is your foot in it until (they) you-fire‘What you cannot do is put your foot in it until you get fired.”The difference between the two varieties can be described as follows. In StSp, thepresuppositional variable is created before spell-out, while in SPSp, it can be created after spelloutvia LF ellipsis. More precisely, in SPSp, both backward and forward deletion applies at LF (asin PF), opening up the possibiliy for an ellipsis mismatch beween what is deleted at PF and what
is deleted at LF. (The mismatch appears to be contrained to the V head and its associatedfunctional categories, subject to similar constraints as noun head ellipsis).(4) PF: [Lo i que [ Neg no [ T puedes [ vP meter la pata] es [[ Neg no [ T puedes [ vP meter la pata]]]]LF: [Lo i que [ Neg no [ T puedes [ vPi meter la pata]]]] es [ [ Neg no [ T puedes [ vP meter la pata]]]]The FocCop, documented in different varieties of Venezuela (Sedano 1998, 1990, 2003,Bosque) and Colombia (Camacho 2006, Mendez-Vallejo 2009), has evolved from the pseudocleft.It lost the overt relative pronoun, bringing about a loss of the existential presuppositioncharacteristic of definite pronouns; cf. (5a) vs. (5b).(5) a. No comió fué nada. (CSp)neg. eat.3Sg.Past be.3Sg.Pret.potatoes ‘He did not eat anything’b. *Lo que no comió fué nada. (StSp)The loss of the overt relative pronoun leads to a major restructuring of the clausestructure: the pre-copular part becomes the main clause. The post-copular part becomes a vP,sister to a reanalyzed copula with a defective T (temporally bound to the minimally c-commanding Tense); copula + vP is adjoined to matrix vP (Camacho 2006). This restructuringwill be argued to account for the fact (among many others to be discussed) that the Neg in thepre-copular part can formally license the NPI in the post-copular part of the clause (5a).In the FocCop structure, the op-variable structure is created at LF (as in SPSp PCleft), via(backward) deletion and null operator insertion. This accounts for the contrast between CSp (6)and StSp (2a): variables created via ellipsis at LF (unlike those created via overt movement)require both syntactic and semantic identity.(6) * Debes hacer es comprar un coche nuevo. (CSp, compare with StSp (2a))Must.2S. do.inf is buy a car newThe FocCop structure in the Andean variety of Columbian Spanish (described byMendez-Vallejo 2009) provides a further argument in favor of the ellipsis-based analysis. In thisdialect, the “given” part of the VP may surface either in the pre-copular part (via PF forwarddeletion) or post-copular part (via PF backward deletion).(7) Clara le trajo fué GALLETAS (CSp, Andean variety)Clara Dat Cl.bring. be.3Sg.Pret. cookies ‘It was cookies that Clara brought for Armando’The case of “focusing via marked word ordering” in StSp (Zubizarreta 1998) representsthe ultimate grammaticalization stage, with a reduplicated VP (8). This construction will beshown to be akin to the CSp FocCop, but crucially with no copula-bearing Tense.(8) Me regaló un libro Maria ‘it was Maria who gave me a book’ (StSp)PF: [ TP me regaló [ vP [ vP Maria regal√ el libro ]] [[ vP Maria regal√ el libro]]LF: [Op k [ TP me regaló [Ev-T [ vP [ vP DP k regal√ el libro]] [ vP [ DPk Maria] regal√ el libro]]To summarize, assuming an ellipsis-based analysis, the PCleft in SPSp (with an overt rel.pron but covert op-vbl formation), the FocCop in CSp (with no overt rel. pron. and covert op-vblformation), and the “focusing via marked word-order” in StSp (with covert op-vbl formation andno copula) can be seen as different stages of an incremental grammaticalization of the biclausalAssertion Structure of the sentence.
Page 1 and 2:
GLOW Newsletter #70, Spring 2013Edi
Page 3 and 4:
INTRODUCTIONWelcome to the 70 th GL
Page 5:
Welcome to GLOW 36, Lund!The 36th G
Page 8 and 9:
REIMBURSEMENT AND WAIVERSThe regist
Page 10 and 11:
STATISTICS BY COUNTRYCountry Author
Page 12 and 13:
15:45-16:00 Coffee break16:00-17:00
Page 14 and 15:
14:00-15:00 Adam Albright (MIT) and
Page 16 and 17:
17:00-17:30 Anna Maria Di Sciullo (
Page 18 and 19:
16.10-16.50 Peter Svenonius (Univer
Page 20 and 21:
GLOW 36 WORKSHOP PROGRAM IV:Acquisi
Page 22 and 23:
The impossible chaos: When the mind
Page 24 and 25:
17. Friederici, A. D., Trends Cogn.
Page 26 and 27:
Second, tests replicated from Bruen
Page 28 and 29:
clusters is reported to be preferre
Page 30 and 31:
occur (cf. figure 1). Similar perfo
Page 32 and 33:
argument that raises to pre-verbal
Page 34 and 35:
Timothy Bazalgette University of
Page 36 and 37:
. I hurt not this knee now (Emma 2;
Page 38 and 39:
Rajesh Bhatt & Stefan Keine(Univers
Page 40 and 41:
SIZE MATTERS: ON DIACHRONIC STABILI
Page 42 and 43:
ON THE ‘MAFIOSO EFFECT’ IN GRAM
Page 44 and 45:
The absence of coreferential subjec
Page 46 and 47:
PROSPECTS FOR A COMPARATIVE BIOLING
Page 48 and 49:
A multi-step algorithm for serial o
Page 50 and 51:
Velar/coronal asymmetry in phonemic
Page 52 and 53:
On the bilingual acquisition of Ita
Page 54 and 55:
Hierarchy and Recursion in the Brai
Page 56 and 57:
Colorful spleeny ideas speak furiou
Page 58 and 59:
A neoparametric approach to variati
Page 60 and 61:
Lexical items merged in functional
Page 62 and 63:
Setting the elements of syntactic v
Page 64 and 65:
Language Faculty, Complexity Reduct
Page 66 and 67:
Don’t scope your universal quanti
Page 68 and 69:
Restricting language change through
Page 70 and 71:
4. Conclusion This micro-comparativ
Page 72 and 73:
2. Central Algonquian feature hiera
Page 74 and 75:
availability of the SR reading in (
Page 76 and 77:
Repairing Final-Over-Final Constrai
Page 78 and 79:
a PF interface phenomenon as propos
Page 80 and 81:
(b) Once the learner has determined
Page 82 and 83:
cognitive recursion (including Merg
Page 84 and 85:
can be null, or lexically realized,
Page 86 and 87:
feature on C and applies after Agre
Page 88 and 89:
Nobu Goto (Mie University)Deletion
Page 90 and 91:
Structural Asymmetries - The View f
Page 92 and 93:
FROM INFANT POINTING TO THE PHASE:
Page 94 and 95:
Some Maladaptive Traits of Natural
Page 96 and 97:
Constraints on Concept FormationDan
Page 98 and 99:
More on strategies of relativizatio
Page 100 and 101:
ReferencesBayer, J. 1984. COMP in B
Page 102 and 103:
Improper movement and improper agre
Page 104 and 105:
Importantly, while there are plausi
Page 106 and 107:
This hypothesis makes two predictio
Page 108 and 109:
(3) a. Það finnst alltaf þremur
Page 110 and 111:
(2) Watashi-wa hudan hougaku -wa /*
Page 112 and 113:
However when the VP (or IP) is elid
Page 114 and 115:
More specifically, this work reflec
Page 116 and 117:
modality, or ii) see phonology as m
Page 118 and 119:
(I) FWHA The wh-word shenme ‘what
Page 120 and 121:
1The historical reality of biolingu
Page 122 and 123:
Rita Manzini, FirenzeVariation and
Page 124 and 125:
Non-counterfactual past subjunctive
Page 126 and 127:
THE GRAMMAR OF THE ESSENTIAL INDEXI
Page 128 and 129:
Motivating head movement: The case
Page 130 and 131:
Limits on Noun-suppletionBeata Mosk
Page 132 and 133:
Unbounded Successive-Cyclic Rightwa
Page 134 and 135:
Same, different, other, and the his
Page 136 and 137:
Selectivity in L3 transfer: effects
Page 138 and 139:
Anaphoric dependencies in real time
Page 140 and 141:
Constraining Local Dislocation dial
Page 142 and 143:
A Dual-Source Analysis of GappingDa
Page 144 and 145:
[9] S. Repp. ¬ (A& B). Gapping, ne
Page 146 and 147:
of Paths into P path and P place is
Page 148 and 149:
Deriving the Functional HierarchyGi
Page 150 and 151: Reflexivity without reflexivesEric
Page 152 and 153: Reuland, E. (2001). Primitives of b
Page 154 and 155: on v, one associated with uϕ and t
Page 156 and 157: Merge when applied to the SM interf
Page 158 and 159: 1 SachsThe Semantics of Hindi Multi
Page 160 and 161: Covert without overt: QR for moveme
Page 162 and 163: Morpho-syntactic transfer in L3 acq
Page 164 and 165: one where goals receive a theta-rel
Page 166 and 167: 51525354555657585960616263646566676
Page 168 and 169: follow Harris in assuming a ranked
Page 170 and 171: changing instances of nodes 7 and 8
Page 172 and 173: Sam Steddy, steddy@mit.eduMore irre
Page 174 and 175: Fleshing out this model further, I
Page 176 and 177: (5) Raman i [ CP taan {i,∗j}Raman
Page 178 and 179: properties with Appl (introduces an
Page 180 and 181: econstruct to position A then we ca
Page 182 and 183: (5) Kutik=i ez guret-a.dog=OBL.M 1S
Page 184 and 185: sults summarized in (2) suggest tha
Page 186 and 187: Building on Bhatt’s (2005) analys
Page 188 and 189: Underlying (derived from ON) /pp, t
Page 190 and 191: out, as shown in (3) (that the DP i
Page 192 and 193: Word order and definiteness in the
Page 194 and 195: Visser’s Generalization and the c
Page 196 and 197: the key factors. The combination of
Page 198 and 199: Parasitic Gaps Licensed by Elided S
show all

Practical Information - Generative Linguistics in the Old World

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?